Barrons : The S&P 500 Could Gain Another 10% Next Year, Experts Say

The S&P 500 Could Gain Another 10% Next Year, Experts Say

This year brought heartache to Main Street but joy to Wall Street. Next year, if vaccines vanquish the coronavirus, as expected, and the economy rebounds, it could be a time of celebration for both.

Even though U.S. stocks are at all-time highs today, market strategists see the S&P 500 index rising further in 2021, propelled by a stronger economy, robust profit growth, and still-massive stimulus from governments and central banks, which paved the way for this year’s advance by keeping interest rates near zero. Even better, the market’s leadership could broaden well beyond big tech stocks to encompass financials, industrials, and other economically sensitive shares left behind by 2020’s rally.

As the year unfolds, however, expect more talk on Wall Street about the potential consequences of the government’s largess, namely resurgent inflation and an eventual rise in rates, which could put a lid on the market’s ebullience in 2022. But that’s getting ahead of the story, just when the plot is about to improve.

Barron’s recently surveyed 10 market strategists and chief investment officers at large banks and money-management firms on the outlook for 2021. Averaging their year-end S&P 500 forecasts, which range from 3800 to 4400, the group expects the index to rise some 9% next year, to about 4040. Add a dividend yield of around 2%, and U.S. stocks could return a total of 10% to 11%—no mean feat after this year’s 17% return, which lifted the S&P 500 to 3700 through Friday.

Our panel sees the U.S. economy growing by 5% in 2021, its fastest rate since 1984. That’s after a year in which gross domestic product plummeted by 31.4% in the second quarter, as the pandemic gripped the country, and soared by 33.1% in the third, as the Federal Reserve and the government rode to the rescue with multiple spending and lending programs.

As for S&P earnings in 2021, the average Wall Street estimate is $168, ahead of 2019’s $161 and well above this year’s depressed $138. Our experts mostly see earnings topping $170, with stock prices anticipating the gain in a strong first half of the year.

The past year’s—and decade’s—undisputed stock market winners were fast-growing, virus-resistant, software-focused technology concerns (and Tesla ; ticker: TSLA). Companies such as Amazon.com (AMZN), Netflix (NFLX), and Zoom Video Communications (ZM) might as well have been made for the stay-at-home pandemic economy. Their businesses flourished, while near-zero interest rates encouraged investors to bid up their shares. Zoom, for one, which barely ekes out a profit, has seen its stock soar nearly 500% in 2020. Investors’ hunger for growth, or the promise of it, similarly fueled a stampede into DoorDash (DASH), Snowflake (SNOW), and Airbnb (ABNB), among this year’s hottest new issues.

By the back half of 2021, as the pandemic fades and the economy reopens, it should be much easier to find companies with rapidly growing earnings, our forecasters say. Industrial outfits, retailers, banks, and other businesses far beyond tech could benefit from pent-up demand and easy year-over-year comparisons. And their stocks are much cheaper today than those of the market’s tech leaders. Don’t expect buyers to wait until late in the year to scoop up their shares.

Dubravko Lakos-Bujas, J.P. Morgan’s chief U.S. equity strategist, has the highest S&P 500 target among our group. He sees the index hitting 4000 in the first months of 2021, and drifting up to 4400 by the end of the year, for a potential gain of 19% from current levels. “Equities are facing one of the best backdrops in years,” Lakos-Bujas says. “Risks relating to global trade tensions, political uncertainty, and the pandemic, will be going away. At the same time, liquidity conditions remain extremely supportive, and there’s an extremely favorable interest-rate environment. That’s a Goldilocks environment for risky assets.”

He also points to the potential for corporate stock buybacks to pick up in 2021, and for a weaker U.S. dollar to boost the earnings of multinational companies.

If Lakos-Bujas represents the ebullient end of the spectrum, Tobias Levkovich, Citigroup’s chief U.S. equity strategist, and Savita Subramanian, head of U.S. equity and quantitative strategy at BofA Securities, have lower expectations for the S&P 500, albeit for different reasons. Levkovich suggests that any broadening of the rally, if accompanied by a rotation away from megacap techs, could crimp the index’s gains because of its capitalization-weighted construction.

“One visual I like to use is that of a duck or swan placidly moving along the surface of a pond, but underneath the water, its webbed feet are going crazy,” he says. “Another is that it’s easier to pull a dog sled with huskies than with Chihuahuas. The megacap tech companies are the huskies, but that’s not where the real improvement in trend will be. It will be in the smaller, cyclical Chihuahuas. They’ll just have a harder time pulling the S&P 500 dog sled.”

As a result, he sees the index ending the year at 3800, just 2% above recent levels. Like many forecasters, he recommends overweighting financials, industrials, and health-care stocks in 2021, among others.

Subramanian, who also has a year-end target of 3800 for the U.S. benchmark index, thinks that this year’s market rally has borrowed from next year’s gains. “There will again be a disconnect in how the markets and the economy do in 2021,” she says. “Our view is that the economy sees an aggressive recovery and that corporate earnings see an aggressive recovery, but the market returns are less robust, given that a lot of gains from next year have been pulled into this year.”

Lakos-Bujas has the highest earnings forecast of the group: $178. Saira Malik, global head of equities at Nuveen, TIAA’s investment unit, is just below that, at $177. “This bull market isn’t some well-kept secret,” says Malik. “[Stock] valuations are quite high, and investors are optimistic, so we will need to have that handoff from valuations to earnings growth. But there is upside to the consensus earnings estimate.”

Even if valuations come in a bit, faster earnings growth could mean that the S&P 500 still has room to rise. The index currently goes for a rich 22 times 2021 expected earnings, supported by the low-rate environment. “On absolute metrics like price/earnings...the market is very expensive relative to its history, in the 90th percentile or greater,” says David Kostin, chief U.S. equity strategist at Goldman Sachs. “But relative to interest rates, the stock market is somewhat attractively valued. Those are two different stories—absolute valuation versus relative valuation.”

A flight to safety and the Fed’s massive monetary-policy intervention sent bond prices higher and yields lower this year, making stocks a much more attractive alternative to investors. After dipping below 0.5% in March, the yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury recently stood at 0.94%, down from 1.92% at the start of the year. On average, the panel expects the 10-year note to yield 1.42% at the end of 2021, still unusually low by historical standards.

“Our core message to clients is that the thing you’ve got to get right in 2021 more than equities is fixed income,” says Lori Heinel, State Street Global Advisors’ deputy global chief investment officer, who will become global CIO in March. “Rates are incredibly low, spreads are relatively tight—although we believe they can tighten further—and if you get an equity selloff, you don’t get the ballast from your fixed-income allocation that you would normally have. Rates are already so low that there’s precious little space for bonds to rally.”

Even “high yield” bonds don’t offer the risk-justifying yields of yore. The ICE BofA US High Yield index, which includes below-investment-grade bonds, yields just 4.5% these days.

“With more robust economic growth, we favor more risk-on sectors [in fixed income] than the safer sectors like Treasuries or other developed-market sovereign debt,” says Rob Sharps, head of investments at T. Rowe Price. “Nobody should own the 10-year here outside of hedging. It’s not an attractive investment unless you’re superbearish.”

Strategists have a similar view of gold. It has a role in a portfolio as a diversifier but isn’t likely to have another year of outperformance as investors’ preference shifts to riskier assets. The group’s average forecast is for gold to end 2021 at $1,881 an ounce, about even with its current level.

For those seeking income, Sharps recommends alternatives to bonds, including bank loans, available through the T. Rowe Price Floating Rate fund (PRFRX), with a 3.4% yield. Invesco Senior Loan (BKLN) is the largest exchange-traded fund in the space, and currently yields 2.8%.

See also: Barron’s Top 10 Stocks for the New Year

In U.S. corporate debt, some high-yield bonds deserve a look, Sharps says, including those of companies that until recently were rated investment-grade. The VanEck Vectors Fallen Angel High Yield Bond ETF (ANGL) yields 3.7%, and includes debt issued by companies such as Carnival (CCL), Newell Brands (NWL), and Occidental Petroleum (OXY). With an improving economic backdrop, the downside risks to such companies are smaller than their upside potential, says Sharps.

Heinel and other strategists also like local-currency emerging market sovereign and corporate debt, which sports higher yields than developed-market debt and could offer some currency return. A weaker U.S. dollar in 2021 is another near-consensus forecast.

An improving global economy is also a tailwind for emerging markets, which tend to be more cyclical than developed markets. Emerging market bond ETFs include the VanEck Vectors J.P. Morgan EM Local Currency Bond (EMLC), which yields about 4%, and the SPDR Bloomberg Barclays Emerging Markets Local Bond (EBND), yielding 3.3%.

Perhaps the most pressing question for the latter half of 2021 is the path of inflation—and on that, there’s little consensus. There are good arguments for both a snappy pickup in prices and a continued slow rate of price growth in the U.S. and other developed economies.

“I’m not in the inflation camp, but I’m monitoring it, because that will probably be the make-or-break variable for 2021 and beyond. ”

— Edward Yardeni
On one hand, the money supply has ballooned in 2020, as central banks have embarked on unprecedented easing campaigns, with a nearly 25% increase in the supply of U.S. dollars just in the past nine months. Interest rates remain near zero, and savings-rich consumers’ pent-up demand could outstrip supply in numerous pockets of the newly reopened economy later in 2021. In addition, the mammoth government deficits around the world aren’t going away anytime soon. And, under the Fed’s new policy framework adopted this year, officials won’t be proactive in stopping inflation from running hot in the coming cycle.

“I’m not in the inflation camp, but I’m monitoring it because that will probably be the make-or-break variable for 2021 and beyond,” says Edward Yardeni, president of Yardeni Research. “If inflation makes a significant and sustained comeback, the Fed is going to have to let interest rates go up. The impact on stock valuations, on compounding debt, on these zombie companies that have been able to stay in business only because of record-low interest rates—they’re toast.”

On the other hand, postpandemic spending may prove to be only a temporary inflation shock, and the unemployment rate will remain high, dampening wage pressures, while commercial rents—a contributor to services inflation—aren’t likely to snap back suddenly. And, the same disinflationary forces that have weighed on price growth over the past decade are still in place. Those include an aging population that prioritizes saving over spending, and technological improvements that reduce costs and boost productivity.

Still, the potential implications of a steady rise in prices could be severe, especially if the Fed and other central banks respond with higher benchmark interest rates. Heavily indebted firms and governments would be left with higher costs and have more difficulty refinancing their borrowings. The stock market could tumble, as lofty valuation multiples are challenged by a higher discount rate. Growth and technology stocks, in particular, would be vulnerable to selloffs.


Wall Street is likely to focus more on all of these possibilities in the second half of 2021.
As for Fed policy, all 10 strategists and CIOs with whom Barron’s spoke take officials at their word that the central bank won’t be raising interest rates anytime soon. The panel is unanimous in thinking that the federal-funds rate will remain at a targeted range of 0.00% to 0.25% at the end of 2021. But several see the potential for a reduction in quantitative easing in the second half of the year, from the Fed’s current purchase pace of at least $120 billion of bonds a month.

If the U.S. economic recovery unfolds as anticipated and inflation appears, then a change in tone from Fed officials may be in store—from “not even thinking about thinking about raising rates,” to “thinking about thinking about raising rates,” perhaps as soon as in 2022. Expect stock and bond markets to react to that messaging shift well ahead of any actual changes in target rates.

Banks, and bank stocks, would be the primary beneficiaries of higher long-term interest rates, given the industry’s business model: borrowing at short-term rates and lending at longer-term ones. Malik calls Bank of America (BAC), Goldman Sachs Group (GS), and Morgan Stanley (MS) her favorite picks among the group.

Financials, broadly, have several fans among these forecasters. Cheaper relative valuations, cyclical exposure, and a steepening yield curve are all tailwinds for the sector. The possibility of more stringent bank regulation appears to be off the table, even if Democrats win both Georgia Senate seats next month. Plus, the big banks may have overreserved in 2020 for possible loan losses, giving them additional capital to put to work in 2021.

An improving economic backdrop lessens credit risk and makes it more likely that the Fed will greenlight larger capital-return programs for the banking industry—a big contributor to financials’ performance in recent years.

Michael Fredericks, head of income investing for BlackRock’s Multi-Asset Strategies team, emphasizes companies with the ability to increase their dividends in 2021—including financials. He sees a broader base of investors in fixed income shifting some of their allocation to dividend growers, noting that many companies in the S&P 500 have a higher dividend yield on their equity than on their debt.

“Relative to where bond yields are now, dividend yields continue to be pretty noteworthy,” says Fredericks. “Fixed income says it right on the label, that income is fixed. Being able to find companies with an income stream that will grow over time is really valuable. And there’s little to no price-appreciation potential in the [investment-grade or high-yield] bond markets, unlike these dividend-growing stocks.”

Fredericks also sees dividend-growth potential in health care, another popular overweight. Election-related risk seems diminished here, too, and the sector is a cheaper way to get some growth exposure than technology. Vaccine champion Pfizer (PFE), for example, yields 4.1%, having increased its first-quarter dividend payment this month. Insurer UnitedHealth Group (UNH) is expected to grow earnings at about 12% annually in coming years, and its stock yields 1.5%.

Bond-proxy sectors, including utilities, real estate, and, to some extent, consumer staples are near-consensus underweights among this group. Those areas of the market do well when investors get defensive and interest rates fall. Strategists expect 2021 to favor the opposite on both counts.

Much will depend in the year ahead on a smooth rollout of vaccines to protect against Covid-19, the disease caused by the coronavirus. Any mutations in the virus that could extend the pandemic would cause Wall Street to rethink its bullish stance.

Humanity is due for some good news and good cheer, however, so let’s hope for the best in the medical sphere—and that the postpandemic world brings even more opportunities for investors.

Barrons : European Rebound Is Ahead, but It Could Be a Weak One

European Rebound Is Ahead, but It Could Be a Weak One

The European economy will continue to suffer from the effects of the coronavirus pandemic in the first half of 2021. And while Brexit will mostly hurt the U.K., it will have an economic cost for Europe broadly, even if the country signs a trade deal with the European Union before Dec. 31.

For 2021, the “GDP profile depends on how the pandemic pans out,” Deutsche Bank analysts say. Markets next year will operate under a double umbrella of continued fiscal support through public spending and generous central bank asset-buying programs
ECB Boosts Bond-Buying Program and Keeps Rate Steady
The European Central Bank on Thursday added €500 billion ($600 billion) to its pandemic-specific asset-buying program.
Continue reading that will ensure that governments can keep borrowing at the lowest historical rates.

Economists and forecasters hope they won’t have to revise their predictions as often as they did in 2020, when governments alternated between imposing strict lockdowns to fight the pandemic and loosening the restrictions—only to be forced back into strict measures by a virulent second wave.

Back in November 2019, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development predicted that the world’s gross domestic product would expand by 8% in the three years through 2022. Now, it sees growth at half that level over the same period.

At least the international organization can opine that “for the first time since the pandemic began, there is now hope for a brighter future.” But the experience has been trying, and for the first time the OECD is publishing two alternative scenarios. The optimistic one sees the vaccines work, they are distributed effectively, and international cooperation in tackling the pandemic gets a boost with the arrival of the new U.S. administration. In the pessimistic scenario, the distribution of the vaccines is hampered by logistical difficulties, secondary effects hit people’s confidence in them, and a third wave forces governments into new restrictions.

The difference between the upside and downside scenarios? Some $7 trillion of the world’s gross domestic product, the equivalent of almost three times France’s annual output.

The arrival of the vaccines show that some form of rebound lies ahead. But it might be hesitant, or delayed.

This will be “a long but shallow recovery, with big scars—if all goes well,” Bank of America analysts say. Like others, they note that the first half of the year might disappoint previous expectations of a swift recovery. Unemployment levels will remain unusually high throughout the region, corporate debt is at all-time highs, and insolvencies and bankruptcies will multiply. The weak initial growth will prove insufficient to correct the imbalances brought by the 2020 recession. It will be “canteen food for everyone,” the BofA analysts sum up.

There is, however, a slight hope that the new restrictions imposed throughout Europe for the Christmas season might have a lesser impact than the lockdowns of the first half of 2020. “Companies and consumers have learned to adapt,” UBS chief economist Paul Donovan writes.

Sectors worth watching? Established physical retailers, as opposed to the purely online players, and leisure firms including restaurant groups, bars, and cinema chains could all rebound in the second half of the year. That’s because, at some point, consumers will go back to spending the money they were forced to save in 2020.

That should, in turn, prompt companies that have delayed major decisions to invest again, even as governments boost their own public-investment effort to pull economies out of the slump. If, that is, there is confidence that the coronavirus vaccines work, and if governments have learned from their 2020 mistakes.

FT : Lords criticise ‘flawed’ plan to give HMRC extra tax powers

Lords criticise ‘flawed’ plan to give HMRC extra tax powers
Peers say Revenue should not be able to bypass tribunals and force disclosure of assets

New powers that would allow the UK tax authority to force financial institutions to provide information about people’s assets without court approval are “flawed” and part of a trend of removing taxpayer protections, members of the House of Lords have said.

In a report released on Saturday, the Lords economics affairs committee strongly criticised a proposal contained in the draft finance bill, which would become law if approved by parliament next year.

The measure would require banks, investment advisers, fund managers, credit unions, insurance companies and credit card issuers to divulge information about their customers if served with a “financial institution notice” by HM Revenue & Customs. The information would be used by the authority for checking an individual’s assets for tax purposes or the collection of tax debts.

Currently, HMRC can only ask a third party to provide information about an individual’s financial affairs if the person agrees or the tax tribunal approves the request.

“[The committee] is very concerned about the removal of taxpayer safeguards for information requests, particularly the need to request permission from the tax tribunal,” the report said. “These proposals are flawed and not supported by evidence.”

The government said the change is needed to make it quicker and easier for HMRC to share information with foreign tax authorities. But HMRC revealed to the committee that in the 2019-20 tax year, it requested only 49 international third party information notices out of 426 such applications.

The report did not say how many of the applications were approved.

“The overwhelming majority of cases which go to the tax tribunal are domestic. It is disproportionate to deny UK taxpayers the tribunal safeguard for the sake of speeding up a small minority of cases involving international requests,” the committee said.

The peers also criticised the proposal as being part of a “pattern of new HMRC powers being disproportionate, poorly targeted and without sufficient safeguards”.

In the past decade, HMRC has been given a range of powers to help it fight tax avoidance and evasion. However, the committee has previously said the balance has swung too far in HMRC’s favour at taxpayers’ expense. The increase in powers had also not led to HMRC defeating a “hard core” group of 20-30 developers of tax avoidance schemes, the report added, although it welcomed HMRC’s efforts to pursue the problem further.

“We are troubled that these types of scheme continue to proliferate, and that many of those people unwittingly caught in these schemes are on lower incomes,” it said.

A government spokesperson said HMRC was increasingly focusing its resources on tackling avoidance scheme developers and that over the past five years many had left the market.

“Our amendments to civil information powers contain numerous safeguards for taxpayers,” the spokesperson added.

“We consulted widely on these proposals as we do on all changes in tax policy and HMRC powers, using a range of evidence and consultative approach to ensure policies are soundly based and thoroughly tested.

“We keep HMRC’s powers under constant review to ensure it is able to effectively and proportionately combat those who do not comply with their tax obligations.”

FT : Robinhood faces questions over business model after US censures

Robinhood faces questions over business model after US censures
Silicon Valley brokerage’s practices under scrutiny after accusations by regulators

Robinhood’s quest to disrupt Wall Street with its sleek app and promise to “democratise” trading has itself been disrupted by a duo of US regulatory actions that highlight the tougher scrutiny the Silicon Valley broker faces.

The broker agreed a $65m settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Thursday over allegedly failing to deliver value for clients, just days after accusations by the Massachusetts Securities Division that it has “gamified” investing.

The moves show the pressure the $11.7bn upstart is under as it looks to compete with established rivals like Charles Schwab and ETrade. 

While Robinhood has drawn millions of Americans into the financial markets with its no-commission approach, analysts say the company must now manage the delicate transition from scrappy tech start-up to a significant player in the highly-regulated financial industry. The challenges present a new roadblock to Robinhood, and they cut to the heart of its business just as its leaders push ahead with an initial public offering.

“What you have is a populist who is trying to bend all the rules and running into regulatory scrutiny,” said John Coffee, a professor at Columbia Law School who specialises in financial regulation.

Robinhood has rushed in recent months to shift from disruptive outsider to a part of the establishment with a series of hires from competitors. The recruitment drive has bulked out its compliance teams, with the majority of employees in those departments having joined over the past three months, Robinhood said.

Robinhood hired two chief compliance officers in September, Norm Ashkenas, formerly the head of compliance at Fidelity, and Kelly Zigaitis, from Wells Fargo where she worked as head of oversight and controls. Former Goldman Sachs lawyer Janet Broeckel has taken over regulatory enforcement and litigation at the platform.

Professor Coffee warned, however, that despite the changes made in recent months, “beefing up compliance won’t necessarily work if you’re still pushing risky investment strategies like day trading”.

The Massachusetts regulator struck at this issue when it censured Robinhood this week over its push to find new customers, many of whom were inexperienced, and coax them to trade. The watchdog found more than two-thirds of the residents in the state who had been approved to trade options had little or no investment experience.


The group’s zero-commission model relies on high trading volumes, and it encourages users to the platforms with frequent email updates, mobile phone alerts and emoji-laden messages. Confetti blasts, which pop up when customers complete trades, add to the sense that it is a game.

Users receive free shares in popular companies for bringing their friends to the platform. Robinhood has at times been overwhelmed by its user volume, and experienced roughly 70 outages or disruptions since the start of the year, according to the Massachusetts regulator.

The regulator said the company used “gamification strategies to manipulate customers” to trade over and over again.

“It has become like Candy Crush in the way they have engaged with user attention-grabbing techniques first developed in Silicon Valley,” added Paul Rowady, a director at Alphacution, which does research on trading firms.

Robinhood has disputed the Massachusetts charges and said it would defend itself.

A group of academics highlighted similar concerns in a paper published in October that said Robinhood’s simplified user experience, which features shortlists of popular shares each day, drives novice investors into “extreme herding episodes”. Investors all buy the same shares, driving up the price and hurting their returns, the researchers found.

“A lot of the good things Robinhood did started from good intentions,” said Xing Huang, co-author of the study and a finance professor at Olin Business School at Washington university. “They made the stock market simpler and financially accessible. But we need to understand that there is a dark side to these measures.”

The SEC complaint centred on one of Robinhood’s most vital revenue streams: the money it receives from market makers who process its clients’ trades, a practice known as payment for order flow.

Robinhood had negotiated rates with these high-speed trading firms that were “significantly” higher than the deals other online brokerages had cut, leading to inferior pricing or “execution” on its customers’ orders, according to the SEC complaint.

The group earned these higher fees at the expense of its customers who would have saved $34m combined if they had gone to a competitor between 2016 and 2019, the SEC said. The company neither admitted nor denied the charges.

“The settlement relates to historical practices that do not reflect Robinhood today,” said Dan Gallagher, Robinhood’s chief legal officer. “We recognise the responsibility that comes with having helped millions of investors make their first investments, and we’re committed to continuing to evolve Robinhood as we grow to meet our customers’ needs.”

The company could yet face litigation from customers that the SEC and Massachusetts alleged were harmed by its practices, said Charles Whitehead, a professor at Cornell Law School.

Paul Helms, a partner at law firm McDermott Will and Emery and a former attorney in the SEC’s enforcement division, said the regulatory actions could push the company to rethink its business model and look to new revenue streams.

“The hard question that the settlement raises is: can their model satisfy their best execution obligations?” Mr Helms asked.

FT : Activist investors take on Rome over economic interference

Activist investors take on Rome over economic interference
Ruling coalition moves to reverse privatisations and limit foreign investment in strategic assets

Activist investors pushing for change in corporate Italy are finding themselves increasingly at odds with the government rather than business bosses because of the state’s growing appetite for intervention.

Over the course of the pandemic, Italy’s ruling coalition has signalled that it is keen to partially reverse decades of privatisations by taking stakes in certain businesses. It has also made it a priority to limit foreign investment in what it deems strategic assets.

Lawyer Francesco Gatti, founding partner of Milan-based Gatti Pavesi Bianchi Ludovici, believes it is essential that the state protects strategic assets in a crisis but “there’s clearly a risk it occupies spaces in the economy without being accountable”.

In recent months, a number of foreign hedge funds and other investors have directly taken on the state to defend their investments against what they argue is unfair meddling by Rome.

Recent examples include the fight by shareholders against a government decision to give itself veto rules over the telecoms company Retelit. The decision was overturned by the Italian courts in September, and a month later Asterion, a Spanish private equity group, acquired a 24.1 per cent stake in the company. 

Another ongoing battle involves a group of foreign investors that has lodged a complaint with the EU over the Italian government’s attempt to force infrastructure group Atlantia to relinquish control of its toll road business. Atlantia owned the company in charge of the Genoa bridge that collapsed two years ago, killing 43 people.

Investors like TCI’s Chris Hohn have said that such government action is illegal and will have a chilling effect on international investment. TCI has since increased its stake in Atlantia to above 10 per cent, in effect becoming its second-largest shareholder, and is engaged in a tug of war with Italian institutions over the toll road business, which it claims is worth at least €2.5bn more than the Italians’ valuation. 

Gianluca Ferrari, founder and chief investment officer of Clearway Capital, who led the shareholder campaign to overturn the Italian government’s intervention in Retelit, said that activists in Europe were having to fight against state intervention.

“As some European governments increasingly overstep their bounds, going beyond simple regulation and oversight, and begin to meddle in business decisions, they will inevitably cross paths with shareholders,” he said. “In the specific case of Retelit, it took two years to ove
the government’s decision which directly resulted in an excellent outcome for the company and for its shareholders.”

Rome’s role in a national broadband project spearheaded by Telecom Italia, which would make it the group’s largest shareholder, has also attracted investor criticism, while some officials have warned that the project might be in conflict with EU competition rules and mean Italy reverting to monopoly provision. 

In August, Telecom Italia delayed the €1.8bn sale of network assets to KKR at the government’s request. According to three people, Telecom Italia’s chief executive Luigi Gubitosi received a phone call from the treasury during a board meeting on August 5 meant to approve the sale, asking him to postpone it in order to firm up the national broadband network deal. The KKR sale was finally agreed at the end of that month.

“What is striking about the Italians right now, is the way they operate,” said one London-based investor.

“They call up chief executives of private companies, like Telecom [Italia], at the last minute dictating their requests, which is kind of shocking.”

Nino Tronchetti Provera, the founder and managing partner of Ambienta, agrees that it is a trend across Europe: “In France, they managed to turn yoghurt into a strategic asset. Just look at what happened with Danone.”

Over the past decade, foreign investors have invested in Italian infrastructure, banks, utilities and telecoms. According to Mr Tronchetti Provera, despite the political environment, foreign money will never turn away from Italy because there are good companies to invest in.

Mr Gatti believes that activists have, in fact, become an important aid to corporate governance, because they have ways to limit state intervention. “Forcing the government to be transparent and accountable is the best defence against dirigisme,” he said.

FT : Next weighs bid for Philip Green’s Topshop

Next weighs bid for Philip Green’s Topshop
Any deal would be part-financed by an investment partner

Next is considering a bid for Philip Green’s Topshop and Topman fashion chains that entered administration at the end of November, most likely in conjunction with a financing partner.

People briefed on the process stressed that no final decision on a bid had been made, and that while Davidson Kempner was the likely choice to act as a negotiating and financing partner, it was not the only option.

Davidson was also recently linked to Peacocks, the discount UK fashion chain owned by Philip Day, which went into administration shortly before Arcadia, the group that owns Topshop.

UK clothing retailer Next, run for almost 20 years by chief executive Simon Wolfson, has not traditionally been acquisitive and has little experience of integrating large and troubled businesses.

It acquired Fabled, the beauty business owned by Ocado, for an undisclosed price last year, as well as Lipsy, a youth fashion brand, for £17m in 2008. Before that, its last acquisition was the Grattan catalogue business in 1986, which formed the basis of Next Directory.

However, Next’s strong balance sheet and well-oiled ecommerce operation have emboldened it as distressed assets have come on to the market at attractive prices owing to the coronavirus pandemic.

Earlier this year, it acquired the UK business of Victoria’s Secret out of administration, and has also taken on several former Debenhams stores that it plans to repurpose into beauty and home stores.

One person said that Next would proceed very cautiously and would not overpay, adding that it was possible that some stores could be retained but this would depend on lease agreements.

“They would not be taking them at the rents they are on at the moment,” the person said.

Topshop’s 173 stores generated sales of £413m in the year to September 2019, with its ecommerce operation adding a further £120m, according to documents circulated to potential bidders by Arcadia’s administrators Deloitte. Its “contribution”, defined as the amount paid towards central overheads excluding depreciation, was £87m.

Topman, most of whose stores are shared with Topshop, generated sales of £143m and a contribution of £25m.

The brands’ combined revenues of £829m, which include sales made through franchises and wholesale partners, compare with £846m the year before. The documents do not provide any details of more recent trading.

A subsidiary of Topshop also owns the freehold of a 1m square foot distribution centre — a potentially valuable asset — though the warehouse in Daventry serves as security for a £50m loan to the company from Tina Green, Sir Philip’s wife and Arcadia’s ultimate owner.

Next’s potential involvement was first reported by Sky News.

The company is one of a substantial number of potential suitors for the Arcadia stable.

Others include Authentic Brands, the US owner of Forever 21, Barneys and Nautica; along with Boohoo, the online fast-fashion group that has already snapped up Karen Millen, Coast and Oasis out of administration.

Mike Ashley’s Frasers Group has also declared an interest in buying any or all of the Arcadia brands, which include Burton, Wallis, Evans, Miss Selfridge and Dorothy Perkins as well as Topshop and Topman.

Next and Deloitte declined to comment.

>>> KPN: Said to remain in talks with several suitors but timing of a deal is un

KPN: Said to remain in talks with several suitors but timing of a deal is unclear. (Betaville)
* Some people suggested a formal transaction won't be announced until mid January 2021
* However, other people have heard talk a deal could be struck soon
* KPN and potential acquirers have been trying to get the Dutch govt and regulators to provide some clarity by end of year on whether they would allow the telecoms company to be bought by a foreign acquirer
* Heard speculation Deutsche Telekom may have shown an interest in KPN and could be one of the companies circling the business; Could be another bidder aside from DTE and EQT
* Heard one of the indicative offers was pitched as high as €3.4 a share

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • SCHL -9.9%, SCS -7.3%, AIR -3.3%, X -3% (guides Q4 EPS and EBITDA below consensus), FDX -3%, CNC -3% (guidance) BB -2.2%, DRI -2.1%

Other news:

  • MESO -29.3% (provides update on COVID-19 ARDS trial)
  • GLSI -11.4% (priced $26.4 mln upsized public offering of common stock)
  • EGLE -8.2% (stock offering)
  • CKPT -5.8% (launched $100 mln at-the-market offering)
  • ASUR -2.9% (stock offering)
  • PRSP -2.6% (awarded $800 mln Navy contract)
  • INN -2.1% (new CEO)
  • UPS -1.4% (in sympathy with FDX earnings report)
  • MRNA -1.4% (confirms receipt of FDA Advisory Committee vote supporting EUA for mRNA-1273)
  • PRAH -1.1% (PRAH enhances COVID-19 monitoring program via collaboration with FLGT and PWNHealth)

Analyst comments:

  • PLTR -3% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at Credit Suisse)
  • CAMP -2.8% (downgraded to Underweight from Neutral at JP Morgan)
  • CLB -1.9% (downgraded to Underweight from Neutral at JP Morgan)
  • DISCA -1.9% (downgraded to Underperform from Buy at BofA Securities)
  • VIAC -1.6% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities)
  • AEG -1.3% (downgraded to Neutral from Outperform at Credit Suisse)
  • XRAY -1.1% (downgraded to Hold from Buy at Stifel)
  • MBT -1% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at New Street)
  • DX -0.9% (downgraded to Mkt Perform from Outperform at Keefe Bruyette)
  • IHRT -0.8% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA Securities)
  • SAFM -0.6% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Goldman)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to earnings/guidance
:

  • WGO +6.1%, APOG +2.7%

M&A news:

  • BEAT +17% (BioTelemetry to be acquired by Philips (PHG) for $72.00 per share), PHG +1.7%

Other news:

  • MREO +38.9% (MREO and RARE announce collaboration and license agreement for setrusumab)
  • DMTK +25.7% (announces positive results of TRUST Study)
  • TLC +6.2% (provides study updates at investor conference; Patient enrollment of EXCELLENCE pivotal trial reaches 98%)
  • ACTG +4.5% (President/CIO disclosed the purchase of 100K shares worth ~$377K (transaction dates 12/15-12/16) )
  • VIR +4.4% (VIR and GSK start of trial evaluating VIR-7831 in hospitalized adults with COVID-19)
  • MNKD +3.5% (announces co-promotion agreement for Thyquidity)
  • DD +3% (approved the separation of DuPont's Nutrition & Biosciences business through an exchange offer)
  • NVO +1.9% (files MMA with EMA for approval of once-weekly semaglutide)
  • BCLI +1.7% (completed in the ongoing Phase 2 trial evaluating NurOwn as a treatment for progressive MS; Topline clinical trial results expected by the end of the first quarter 2021)
  • POR +1.3% (announced the Special Committee of the Board of Directors concluded its independent review of the energy trading activity that led to the losses incurred in the third quarter)
  • AR +1.2% (S&P outlook revised to stable from negative)
  • EGBN +1% (announces new share repurchase program)
  • TME +1% (Tencent Music consortium exercises call option to acquire additional equity interests in Universal Music Group)

Analyst comments:

  • MYE +4.4% (upgraded to Overweight from Sector Weight at KeyBanc Capital Markets)
  • ABNB +3.6% (initiated with a Positive at Susquehanna)
  • DOW +2% (upgraded to Overweight from Neutral at JP Morgan)
  • NRZ +1.6% (upgraded to Outperform from Mkt Perform at Keefe Bruyette)
  • NLY +1% (upgraded to Outperform from Mkt Perform at Keefe Bruyette)